RE: VERY interesting copyright article

Trent Nicholas (Tnicholas@vmfa.state.va.us)
Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:40:36 -0800 (PST)

Bravo! Brava! This discussion is VERRRRYYY interesting. Thank you! All
excellent, thought-provoking points. It sounds like a draw. (Tie goes to
the runner?)
Trent Nicholas

-----Original Message-----
From: Jessica Rosner [SMTP:jrosner@kino.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 1:18 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: VERY interesting copyright article

Darryl
The very definition of copyright is ownership and you can't alter
material
without permission. If this were being done strictly for home use
obviously
no one would notice but the store is doing them for public rental.
Again if
this were legal I could just buy a bunch of legal copies of Disney
films and
insert whatever I wanted so long as I had purchased them and then I
could
rent them out ?. Sorry but I don't have any sympathy for the guy and
for
once I would cheer the MPPA. It goes to the heart of both copyright
and
artists rights that you can't alter without permission.

Jessica

> From: Darryl Wiggers <Darryl.Wiggers@AllianceAtlantis.com>
> Reply-To: videolib@library.berkeley.edu
> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 09:51:07 -0800 (PST)
> To: Multiple recipients of list <videolib@library.berkeley.edu>
> Subject: RE: VERY interesting copyright article
>
> Where is it written that one can't alter a legally purchased copy?
The
> warning on all my videos only talks about public screenings and
copying.
> That's it. Besides, it's not as if he disguising what he's doing.
No one who
> is interested in purchasing an unedited version would be fooled
into dealing
> with this guy...
>
> According to the Copyright Infringement Act of 1976 "Any person
who, with
> fraudulent intent, removes or alters any notice of copyright
appearing on a
> copy of a copyrighted work shall be fined not more than $2,500."
That's it.
> Only the warning can't be "removed" or "altered." And you can't
even claim
> fraud with Mr. CleanVideo. He spells out what is omitted... I
can't find
> anything else in the Copyright Infringement Act that suggests that
what Mr.
> CleanVideo claims he's doing can't be done. Can anyone?
>
> And let's suppose he is nailed. How is his crime different from a
video
> store that sells me a "used" mangled, chewed-up video that's
blurry and full
> of picture drop-outs. That video has been altered too from its
original
> condition. Maybe I can get the MPAA on my local store's case...
>
> Personally I would never do business with Mr. CleanVideo because I
want to
> see my movies unedited. But I'm not convinced that what he's doing
is
> illegal, and cannot share in the drooling enthusiasm to have him
drawn and
> quartered. I especially don't understand why people seem less
bothered by
> corporations who lie, deceive, cheat, overcharge and steal from
millions of
> consumers than a guy who is openly providing a seemingly legal
service that
> his community clearly wants.